Languages
Pages
Legal
Design Project - SIE 2014 Favre Adrien, Martinasso Mélanie!
Comparative eco-assessment : double-flux ventilation / hybrid ventilation
Persons in charge Vahid Nik (LESO-PB)
Romain Kilchherr (Perenzia SA)
The society edms SA (Petit-Lancy, GE) is a civil and environmental engineering firm. They are in charge of a construction site at Céligny (GE) and are interested by the comparison of two ventilation systems.
Context! This study’s objectives are to realize a financial assessment and a comparative life cycle analysis between two ventilation systems : a mechanical double-flux ventilation and a hybrid ventilation.
Objectives!
Technical analysis
• Mechanical & hybrid system description
• Advantages & drawbacks
Financial analysis
• Investment • Maintenance • Electricity cons. • Heat cons.
Life cycle analysis
• Goal and scope
definition • Life cycle
inventory • Life cycle impact
analysis • Sensitivity
analysis
Hybrid ventilation!
Hybrid ventilation = natural + mechanical ventilation Electrical turbine works if Tin-Tout ≤ 4°C
Advantages • Low electric consumption • Low cost and easy
maintenance • Robust system • Inexpensive installation • No sanitary risk on incoming
air • Low roo!op obstruction
Drawbacks • No heat recovery • More heating needed • Not the best system for large
surfaces • Important architectural
constraints • Noise problems
! ! II. Financial analysis!!!
Cost overview considering an increasing electricity cost and the heating:
Total cost of the two ventilations over 20 years:
! ! III. Life cycle analysis!
+ : important impact - : minor impact
Const. Heat Elec. EoL Trans.0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2Human health [DALY]
DA
LY
Hybrid vent.Mechanical vent.
Const. Heat Elec. EoL Trans.0
5
10
15x 104Ecosystem quality [PDF*m2*yr]
PD
F*m
2 *yr
Hybrid vent.Mechanical vent.
Const. Heat Elec. EoL Trans.0
5000
10000
15000Climate change [kg CO2,eq.]
kg C
O2,
eq.
Hybrid vent.Mechanical vent.
Const. Heat Elec. EoL Trans.0
2
4
6x 105 Ressources [MJ primary]
MJ
prim
ary
Hybrid vent.Mechanical vent.
Mechanical double-flux ventilation!
Advantages • Airflow entirely controled • Easily regulated • Heat recovery • Homogeneous distribution of
fresh air • Filtration of incoming air
Drawbacks • Significant electric
consumption • Significant investment &
maintenance • Takes a lot of space • Pipe system is embedded in
slabs (more concrete used) • Unpleasant noise
Fresh air is pumped in from the outside and old air is pumped out from the inside. Heat recovery system pre-heats air before injection è reduced heating. Does not work in summer
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 20000
40000
60000
80000
100000
120000
140000
160000
Year
Cos
t [C
HF]
Cumulative cost of the two ventilation system for different scenarios
Hybrid : Qmin, 24hHybrid : Qmin, 12hHybrid : Qmax, 24hHybrid : Qmax, 12hVMC : Qmin, 265dVMC : Qmin, 365dVMC : Qmax, 265dVMC : Qmax, 365d
[CHF] Without heating With heating
Hybrid 43’000 83’000 Mechanical 120’000 145’000
Hybrid Mechanical Investment - ++ Maintenance -- + Electricity cons. -- ++ Heating needs + - Human health ++ - Ecosystem qual. ++ - Climate change + ++ Resources - ++
When both financial and environmental factors are taken into account, the hybrid ventilation appears to be the best alternative.
Results!
Conclusion!
Contact : [email protected] | [email protected]!
Const. : construction Elec. : electricity EoL : End of Life Trans. : transport
Methodology!
Study site : building A Surface : 1’608 m2
Volume : 3’765.5 m3
Ventilation flows : • Qmin : 934 m3 / h • Qmax : 1’380 m3 / h
! ! I. Technical analysis!
Top Related